Cakes, chocolate bar, candy bars and various beverages have milk as part of their ingredients too.

How can we totally abstain from taking them?

It's not really all that difficult if you have access to good markets or natural foods stores, etc. Some have non-dairy cakes, etc. Homemade non dairy cake is quite easy. A lot of dark chocolate brands don't have dairy in them. They even have non dairy soy and coconut milk ice cream these days. Most natural foods stores carry a host of non dairy things and depending on where you live, even normal supermarkets will have some of that stuff.

In Sri Lanka our family had a small farm with only one cow for milking purposes. We milk the cow only in the morning and left the calf with the mother cow till evening. We sold excess milk but used all the money just to buy the food for the cow.

We consume too much dairy products in western countries causing allergy reactions. Too much pesticides are used for animal farming. Now I consume soy products instead of cow milk. It is not practical for a Buddhist monk to not to accept milk products as Dana. By products of cows are found every ware. (shoes etc)

I think best thing is to live with one meal a day like a Buddhist monk.

SarathW wrote:We consume too much dairy products in western countries causing allergy reactions. Too much pesticides are used for animal farming.Now I consume soy products instead of cow milk.

I already have a big round of allergy, also against raw soy stuff (beverage, sprouts).To bad. I hope, that will get better over the years.

SarathW wrote:I think best thing is to live with one meal a day like a Buddhist monk.

Do you?

"An important term for meditative absorption is samadhi. We often translate that as concentration, but that can suggest a certain stiffness. Perhaps unification is a better rendition, as samadhi means to bring together. Deep samadhi isn't at all stiff. It's a process of letting go of other things and coming to a unified experience." - Bhikkhu Anālayo

Also I think it's important to note that anyone who's trying to cut milk and eggs out of their diet may want to get either almond, rice, or coconut milk, and not soy milk. As you'll probably have to be eating a lot of soy for your diet, which isn't necessarily that great for you.

PsychedelicSunSet wrote:Also I think it's important to note that anyone who's trying to cut milk and eggs out of their diet may want to get either almond, rice, or coconut milk, and not soy milk. As you'll probably have to be eating a lot of soy for your diet, which isn't necessarily that great for you.

According to whom?

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.” - Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:in mountain clefts and chasms,loud gush the streamlets,but great rivers flow silently.- Sutta Nipata 3.725

PsychedelicSunSet wrote:Also I think it's important to note that anyone who's trying to cut milk and eggs out of their diet may want to get either almond, rice, or coconut milk, and not soy milk. As you'll probably have to be eating a lot of soy for your diet, which isn't necessarily that great for you.

According to whom?

Due to the fact that the vast majority of soy in the US is Monsanto, and therefore genetically modified, eating a lot of it can lead to health issues.

SarathW wrote:We consume too much dairy products in western countries causing allergy reactions. Too much pesticides are used for animal farming.Now I consume soy products instead of cow milk.

I already have a big round of allergy, also against raw soy stuff (beverage, sprouts).To bad. I hope, that will get better over the years.

SarathW wrote:I think best thing is to live with one meal a day like a Buddhist monk.

Do you?

Not eating after mid day is one of my objectives. At this stage it is not practical for me, as I am still working.I am convinced one meal a day could be beneficial to my practice and in general to the world as a whole..I have already started not eating after 6.00 PM. (not possible to follow it all the time though) and found that it is helping me in various ways. (health etc)I am planning to bring this forward to midday gradually.

PsychedelicSunSet wrote:Also I think it's important to note that anyone who's trying to cut milk and eggs out of their diet may want to get either almond, rice, or coconut milk, and not soy milk. As you'll probably have to be eating a lot of soy for your diet, which isn't necessarily that great for you.

According to whom?

Due to the fact that the vast majority of soy in the US is Monsanto, and therefore genetically modified, eating a lot of it can lead to health issues.

Just two links I found by quickly searching dangers of soy. Some food for thought.

Yes, food for thought! But, it would be prudent to get both sides of the story. As there is definitely two, often diametrically opposed, sides to it. The below for example of just one article, but there are many others:

Is Soy Safe?Busting the Myths of a Nutritional Powerhouse

Rarely has a nutritional source gained such rapid acceptance and drawn the kind of hostile scrutiny focused on soy. No sooner did the FDA take the highly unusual step of allowing a health claim to be made for soy as a food in 1999,1,2 than it came under attack by a vocal minority of “concerned citizens”—some of whom were found to represent a narrow segment of the food industry threatened by soy’s profits.3

Thanks to their efforts, considerable misinformation now contaminates the discussion of soy’s real impact on health. Instead of enjoying the broad range of benefits, many aging individuals are unnecessarily fearful of consuming soy products.

The good news is that the popularity and “controversy” surrounding soy have resulted in considerable clinical study and research, giving rise to a wealth of scientific literature that validates soy’s health-promoting potential.

In this article, you will find out how soy became the subject of controversy—and why it shouldn’t be.

SarathW wrote:Not eating after mid day is one of my objectives. At this stage it is not practical for me, as I am still working. I am convinced one meal a day could be beneficial to my practice and in general to the world as a whole. I have already started not eating after 6.00 PM. (not possible to follow it all the time though) and found that it is helping me in various ways. (health etc) I am planning to bring this forward to midday gradually.

May be someone should start a "one meal a day challenge” thread.!!!!!!

Nice. I once had some weeks, where I ate only once per day, that was round about 3-4 pm.My body felt very good during that time. Much more energy than usual.Somehow it's not possible anymore at the moment..

Time will come

Be Well

"An important term for meditative absorption is samadhi. We often translate that as concentration, but that can suggest a certain stiffness. Perhaps unification is a better rendition, as samadhi means to bring together. Deep samadhi isn't at all stiff. It's a process of letting go of other things and coming to a unified experience." - Bhikkhu Anālayo

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.” - Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:in mountain clefts and chasms,loud gush the streamlets,but great rivers flow silently.- Sutta Nipata 3.725

What about killing to control a population? The local hunters frequently remind us that if deer are left unchecked, they will become a danger. Obviously, this could apply to non-food animals/insects (Flies come to mind since there are so many this year), but for this discussion, I'll stick to animals killed for both food and population control. Thoughts? (Note, I'm not a hunter, but this has been a question on my mind for some time.)

I have heard that the government fish & wildlife agencies promote and make it conducive for the breeding of some species such as deer to acquire more hunting license fees and permits.

Even if this were not true, what threat do deer pose? Perhaps, to cars driving on the freeways, but this can be averted. I think it was on this forum where I saw some beautiful pictures of some natural bridges made (perhaps in Australia or New Zealand?) for the wildlife to cross over and avoid the traffic.

I would actually like to see more deer. When I go to the forest to walk on the trails it seems there are fewer each year to see.

Varillon wrote:What about killing to control a population? The local hunters frequently remind us that if deer are left unchecked, they will become a danger. Obviously, this could apply to non-food animals/insects (Flies come to mind since there are so many this year), but for this discussion, I'll stick to animals killed for both food and population control. Thoughts? (Note, I'm not a hunter, but this has been a question on my mind for some time.)

I would appreciate it if you stay on topic which is about the ethics of consumption - not population control.

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.” - Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:in mountain clefts and chasms,loud gush the streamlets,but great rivers flow silently.- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Varillon wrote:...for this discussion, I'll stick to animals killed for both food and population control. Thoughts?

I would appreciate it if you stay on topic which is about the ethics of consumption - not population control.

My apologies, I wasn't clear enough. These animals are going to be killed regardless of consumption, so is it better to throw the meat away or consume? Then there's the case of accidental death by running into an animal, etc. I haven't yet found anything in the suttas to suggest wasting is better than consumption.

Varillon wrote:...for this discussion, I'll stick to animals killed for both food and population control. Thoughts?

I would appreciate it if you stay on topic which is about the ethics of consumption - not population control.

My apologies, I wasn't clear enough. These animals are going to be killed regardless of consumption, so is it better to throw the meat away or consume? Then there's the case of accidental death by running into an animal, etc. I haven't yet found anything in the suttas to suggest wasting is better than consumption.

Please refer to the first post in this thread regarding the subject of this thread.Kind regards,Ben

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.” - Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:in mountain clefts and chasms,loud gush the streamlets,but great rivers flow silently.- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Varillon wrote:...for this discussion, I'll stick to animals killed for both food and population control. Thoughts?

I would appreciate it if you stay on topic which is about the ethics of consumption - not population control.

My apologies, I wasn't clear enough. These animals are going to be killed regardless of consumption, so is it better to throw the meat away or consume? Then there's the case of accidental death by running into an animal, etc. I haven't yet found anything in the suttas to suggest wasting is better than consumption.

With regards to the OP and dairy cows, it's better for them to not even be bred to begin with. The animals are only born in these farms because farmers deliberately breed them to produce more cows to produce more milk. Once they stop producing the milk, they are sent to the slaughterhouse...If demand for milk drops because people stop buying it, less animals will be born into these farms and less animals will suffer and die on these farms because of that. In other words, the animal can't be killed if it's not even born to begin with!